Preview

BRICS Law Journal

Advanced search
Vol 9, No 3 (2022)
View or download the full issue PDF
https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2022-9-3

4
Abstract

В статье рассматривается международный коммерческий арбитраж, один из самых популярных методов разрешения споров в международных коммерческих отношениях. Товарооборот между Россией и Китаем в последние годы постепенно увеличивается, что свидетельствует о чрезвычайной актуальности изучения правового регулирования международного коммерческого арбитража обеих стран. В статье анализируются понятие и источники правового регулирования создания и деятельности международных коммерческих арбитражей в России и материковом Китае. Исследуются порядок рассмотрения дела, разработка арбитражного соглашения, правила создания арбитражной комиссии, требования к арбитражному решению и другие аспекты. Авторы приходят к выводу, что регулирование международного коммерческого арбитража в двух странах схоже и основано на международном праве и национальных правовых актах. И Китай, и Россия приняли нормы Типового закона ЮНСИТРАЛ, хотя и в разной степени. Обе страны предусматривают аналогичные нормы арбитражного соглашения и поддерживают принцип автономии арбитражной оговорки. Отличие заключается в том, что КНР не следует принципу компетентности (полномочия арбитров определять свою компетенцию по рассмотрению определенного спора), поскольку вопрос должен рассматриваться арбитражной комиссией или государственным судом. Российские арбитры вправе самостоятельно определять свою компетенцию. Согласно китайскому законодательству, сторона нуждается в посредничестве третейского суда для подачи ходатайства о принятии временных мер защиты в государственный суд, в то время как в России допускается прямое ходатайство. В Китае нормы о признании и приведении в исполнение судом иностранного арбитражного решения не предусматривают обжалования решения суда, отказ в признании и приведении в исполнение возможен только после рассмотрения решения Верховным Народным Собранием. Суд КНР. Российское законодательство допускает как обжалование решения о признании и приведении в исполнение решения, так и отказ в нем. отказ в признании и приведении в исполнение возможен только после рассмотрения решения Верховным народным судом КНР. Российское законодательство допускает как обжалование решения о признании и приведении в исполнение решения, так и отказ в нем. отказ в признании и приведении в исполнение возможен только после рассмотрения решения Верховным народным судом КНР. Российское законодательство допускает как обжалование решения о признании и приведении в исполнение решения, так и отказ в нем.

ARTICLES 

4-38 447
Abstract

This article examines international commercial arbitration, one of the most popular methods for the resolution of disputes that arise in the context of international commercial relations. The volume of trade between Russia and China has been gradually increasing in recent years, which testifies to the fact that the study of international commercial arbitration legal regulation in both nations is extremely relevant. The authors examine the concept of international commercial arbitration entities, as well as the sources of legal regulation that govern their establishment and operation in Russia and Mainland China. In addition, the procedures for case consideration, the elaboration of arbitration agreements, the rules for the creation of an arbitration commission, the requirements for arbitral awards and other aspects are investigated. The authors come to the conclusion that the regulations governing international commercial arbitration are similar in the two countries and are based on international law and national legal acts. Both Russia and China have adopted the norms outlined in the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law into their legal systems although to different degrees. Both countries provide similar arbitration agreement norms and support the arbitration clause autonomy principle. The difference lies in the fact that China does not follow the competence-competence principle (the arbitrators’ power to determine their own competence to consider a certain dispute). Instead, the issue is referred either to the arbitration commission or to the state court for resolution. On the other hand, arbitrators in Russia have the right to determine their competence by themselves. According to Chinese law, a party requires arbitration court mediation in order to be able to submit a request for provisional protection measures to the state court, while under Russian law adirect request is allowed. In China, the norms for the recognition and enforcement of aforeign arbitration award by the court do not provide for the court’s ruling to be challenged; the refusal of the recognition and enforcement shall be possible only after the award has been considered by the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China. In Russia, the legislation allows for both challenging and refusing the decision to recognize and enforce the award.

39-52 301
Abstract

This article discusses the scope of the constitutional due process clause in Brazilian administrative law, based on an analysis of the Brazilian Constitution, the Fifth (1791) and Fourteenth (1868) Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the European and Inter-American human rights systems. The author concludes that since the due process clause (Brazilian Constitution Article 5.54, namely, “no one shall be deprived of liberty or property without due process of law”) was inspired by the U.S. Constitution, Brazilian legislators should exercise their powers of discretion in policy-making to adapt the clause to the realities of the Brazilian administrative authorities and to the experience of the quasi-independent authorities that perform the adjudicative function under U.S. administrative law.

53-83 296
Abstract

The main focus of this article is to examine in greater depth the content of the admission of guilt, the issue of agreements with an investigation, and the criteria for the admissibility of confessions, using examples from not only the countries with Anglo-American and continental legal systems, but also taking into account the analysis of the legislation of the BRICS countries. Of particular interest are the attitudes of legislators from different countries towards this legal category, depending on their philosophical views, the political and economic environment, as well as the assessment of their readiness to move forward with the promises of humanization of legislation. The topic of guilty pleas in domestic criminal proceedings is not new for researchers and law enforcement officers. Legal scientists have identified both the advantages and the disadvantages of the forms based on this legal category. However, a gradual rejection of confessions as evidence is noticeable, and in the majority of cases, agreement with the prosecution plays a significant role. Despite the fact that confessions are officially no longer considered “the main thing,” in practice we are faced with the fact that, in fact, they are given priority over other forms of evidence. This duality creates uncertainty in scientific circles. We believe that this article can have a positive impact on the process of reforming certain provisions of criminal procedure law regulating procedural components, with mandatory compliance with the rights of participants in legal proceedings guaranteed by the basic laws of the country. To achieve the goal, we used the general scientific dialectical-materialistic method of cognition, as well as the following private scientific methods: logical-legal, comparative-historical, systemstructural. Both judicial practice and scientific research are analyzed in depth.

84-116 452
Abstract

This article examines whether a judicial methodology to the use of comparative law has developed in the jurisprudence of the South African Constitutional Court. It does so by examining 10 recent cases where the Constitutional Court has considered foreign law. The author finds that a clear legal methodology to the use of foreign law has not developed in the jurisprudence of the South African Constitutional Court. Foreign law is often relied on in a piecemeal fashion and these examples are often “cherry picked” with little or no justification provided by the Court. The Court still shows apreference for considering “Global North” experiences. In addition, the Court has mostly failed to consider the social realities and cultural considerations of the comparator countries vis-à-vis those of South Africa.

117-143 323
Abstract

The article examines the current situation in the wheat market in India and its potential within the global food security dynamic. In particular, it analyzes a number of instruments and programs of national policy in the grain sector: minimum support prices, public procurement, public distribution systems, storage facilities and their management, market regulation, trading mechanisms and platforms. In the aspect of the development of Indian grain trade and infrastructure, the Electronic Platform for National Agriculture Market (eNAM) and food commodities exchanges are considered. The article provides explanation on why India’s ambitious plans announced several years ago to expand wheat exports to the world market can hardly be fully realized in the near future due to such reasons as climate risks, phytosanitary problems and quality controls, lack of storage and logistics infrastructure, as well as the huge social and political importance of wheat supplies in the local market. Through the continuation of the current reforms in an efficient manner, India can resume the position of one of the leading wheat exporters. It is proposed that Russia, India and South Africa (as well as the potential new members – Iran and Argentina) create anew BRICS Grain Union.

144-173 295
Abstract

Ubiquitous computerization and digitalization are contributing to the unprecedented growth of the software market. Computer programs are protected as subject of copyright law in international law and domestic legal systems. However, copyright law does not protect the interests of the copyright holder from borrowing ideas and algorithms which often have agreat commercial value. This circumstance has prompted the legal science and law enforcement practice of the most developed states to justify the possibility of protecting computer programs and their algorithms. The leading states chosen for in this paper are the G20 states. The relevance of this choice is due to the following: 1) The G20 states account for 86% of global GDP; 2) All world leaders in computer software development are G20 members; 3) All BRICS states are G20 members; 4) The law-and-orders of the G20 states are relevant to all existing traditions of the legal protection of intellectual property in the world. The legal systems of the G20 states follow one of three approaches according to the criterion of patentability of computer programs and their algorithms. We call the first approach “neutral.” It includes States which legislation does not explicitly prohibit the patenting of computer programs, but computer programs themselves are not mentioned among the subject matters of inventions. The second (“positive”) approach includes those states which legislation explicitly classifies computer programs as patentable inventions. On the contrary, the third (“negating”) approach includes states where it is legally established that computer programs as such are unpatentable. The results of the research demonstrate that there is no direct correlation between the way of solving the issue of patentability of computer program algorithms in different legal systems and the state’s place in the global IT market. For example, the United States and China take aneutral approach, Japan takes apositive approach, the EU Member States and India take anegating approach. We believe that the most flexible approach is aneutral approach from the point of view of patent law policy. The most liberal and consistent approach is the positive approach presented by the Japanese legal system. Finally, the negating approach is the most controversial and at the same time widespread among the G20 and BRICS states.

174-194 289
Abstract

The article focuses on the social dimension of territorial development and investments in Russian regions. The conducted research is devoted to territories with a special regime for business activities in Russia, their investment and innovation background and policy aiming at improving social environment and population well-being. Based on legal analysis and regulatory practices, the authors reveal drivers for strategic management of social and economic development, recommend some rules and underline possible benefits for territories’ residents. The paper discusses the advantages and perspectives of developing territories with aspecial regime for business activities in Russia, alongside with constraining factors discouraging their development. Theoretical issues are exemplified by some priority social and economic development areas created in the Far East. Most attention is paid to the infrastructural development of priority social and economic development areas, while special emphasis is placed on the cluster approach to the development of such territories, a comparison is made with technoparks and industrial parks.

1
Abstract

This text discusses the scope of the constitutional due process clause in Brazilian administrative law, based on an analysis of the Brazilian Constitution, of the Fifth (1791) and Fourteenth Amendments (1868) to the U.S. Constitution, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the European and Inter-American human rights systems. The author concludes that since the due process clause (Brazilian Constitution Article 5.54, i.e. “no one shall be deprived of liberty or property without due process of law”) was inspired by the U.S. Constitution, Brazilian legislators should exercise their powers of discretion in policy-making to adapt the clause to the realities of the Brazilian administrative authorities and to the experience of the quasi-independent authorities that perform the adjudicative function under U.S. administrative law.

FULL LENGTH ARTICLES 

3
Abstract

This article examines whether a judicial methodology to the use of comparative law has developed in the jurisprudence of the South African Constitutional Court. It does so by examining 17 recent cases where the Constitutional Court has considered foreign law. The article finds that a clear legal methodology to the use of foreign law has not developed in the jurisprudence of the Court. Foreign law is often relied on in a piecemeal fashion and these examples are often “cherry picked” with little or no justification provided by the Court. The Court still shows a preference for considering “Global North” experiences. In addition, the Court has mostly failed to consider the social realities and cultural considerations of the comparator countries vis-à-vis those of South Africa.



Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2409-9058 (Print)
ISSN 2412-2343 (Online)
X